The other party in PEF talks

Our opinion: The outcome of the latest talks between the state and PEF will affect this region’s communities. Negotiators should keep that in mind with all their other considerations.

To many New Yorkers, there are just two sides in the dispute over a new contract for the Public Employees Federation — PEF and the state. To the Capital Region, though, there’s a third side — all of us.

This is where an argument that others might see in more abstract terms — say, union survival or reduced government — gets considerably more concrete. It’s about whether or not more than 1,100 of our neighbors will be laid off. That’s the estimated local impact of 3,500 layoffs statewide.

Imagine what a blow it would be to any community if a business with more than a thousand workers suddenly closed its doors, especially at a time when jobs are in short supply just about everywhere.

The consequences for people and their communities ought to raise the stakes for PEF and Governor Cuomo to try to resolve their differences quickly, before the layoffs commence.

We realize that many other issues are in play here. Whichever side of the dispute you’re on, it’s easy to oversimplify the opposition and its motives.

On the state’s and Mr. Cuomo’s side, there is more at stake than balancing the books for a few years. Fundamental changes in how employees and the government share health care costs, for example, are a long-term issue with significant financial implications for the state. It’s a matter of perceived equity, too, in bringing state benefits more into line with the private sector’s.

On the labor side, the considerations run from the personal to the collective — contrary to Mr. Cuomo’s suggestion that the rejection of the contract was all about self-interest.

Certainly, on an individual basis, the rejected contract was hard to swallow. It asked PEF members to accept no raises for several years and endure an actual loss of income in the form of unpaid furlough days, five of which would never be reimbursed, and higher health insurance costs. Rejecting the contract put those issues off at least for another day, since most other terms of the contract stay in place under the Triborough Amendment. PEF members who are not on the likely layoff list have little to lose, in the short run at least.

But there are big issues at stake for union members who take a broader view, too. What does it say about a union’s power — indeed, its relevance — when it bows to demands for givebacks from working class people while the governor refuses to raises taxes on wealthy New Yorkers?

How do you weigh 3,500 layoffs against another chink in the armor of organized labor?

We get that there are major issues here. We also know that the clock is ticking for 3,500 state workers and their families, who in a couple of weeks could be left without paychecks, in danger of losing their homes and the lives they’ve built here. It’s also ticking for the communities that will undoubtedly feel the economic effects of those layoffs in one way or another.

Mr. Cuomo and PEF say they’re trying to rework the failed deal. We urge both sides not to forget the people who will be hurt most, and the communities they’re a part of, as they try to salvage this.

7 Responses

It’s about time the Times Union figured out that whatever happens to the State workforce affects the Capital District. If only the TU would investigate some of the inaccurate and misleading information released by the governor’s office, and those who would like to see government functions privatized, and unions destroyed.
At least the TU could start by differentiating between State employees, and local government employees.

The purpose of the state work force is to provide services to state residents, not to provide jobs to one region of the state at the expense of the financial health of the rest of the state. Seeing such a selfish, greedy, and ignorant argument printed in the Capital Region paper of record is an embarassingly bad reflection on all of us, and hopefully not indicative of the majority opinion. Also, every PEF member I heard from (personally and online) made it clear they voted against the contract for entirely selfish reasons; they didn’t like the pay freeze, they didn’t want to pay more towards their benefits, and they wanted greater job protection. Not one mentioned “the collective” in any way.

PEF members largely knew who would be laid off if it didn’t pass; not everyone, but most. It was an issue of “me, personally against fellow members”. In that light, the rejection was disgusting.

Union members have seen a raise in pay of 13% over the last 7 years, while the majority of the private sector has seen wage freezes, lay offs, and underemployment.

Yes, it will hugely affect the Capital district when these workers are laid off. It’s too bad they didn’t consider that seriously when voting. They were told money needed to be saved and bet that Cuomo wouldn’t hold them to that.

Thank you for finally printing this point of view. Contrary to some of the comments above, I believe most of the opposition to this contract originated from the high-handed approach the new Governor adopted. It was as if we were suddenly being led by a worker-bashing Republican. Take it or Leave it. I already “booked” the concessions before the old contract ran out. Etc. Etc. Yes, the concessions were significant. Of course, individuals would point out the particulars of why they would vote no. And the irony of private sector writers complaining about public sector workers voting in their own self-interest does not escape me. But, therein lies the rub. Because we serve the public, without a productivity or profit motive or incentives, we know that the only way to long-term improvement in our compensation is via the union contract. It’s that simple. We don’t get bonuses when times are good or when we take on extra work and effort. We have to settle for what everyone else gets, basically. That’s why we stick together in voting for our best contract. It is the last several governors that have turned that against us by threatening layoffs. They are the ones sowing discord in our ranks. They are the ones not negotiating with us as partners in the interest of the State. AND, not only don’t they get punished for such an approach, the down-trodden private employees give them their votes and support for it. Along with the business owners and the rich that all vote Republican, predominantly.

Come the revolution, the private workers will come together with us to re-establish progressive taxation and campaign finance reform. Then we will return to the America they remember.

It’s surprising that some people seem to blame the no voters for the pending layoff, rather than the people behind it — the Governor and the Legislature. They are the ones who decided that, for example, reducing taxes on millionaires was more important than maintaining the State workforce at current staffing and pay levels. Perhaps it’s simply that co-workers are a nearer target.

It’s not an issue of co-worker against co-worker at all, simply whether enough members were willing to cave in under the threat of layoffs and accept a poor contract, or not. Now that it’s been rejected perhaps there will be agreement on a contract that is better for all.

How much does the state save with layoffs? subtract unemployment, loss of services, foreclosures, now kids can get free health care, and the lack of 3500 new yorkers spending. Other states are looking better everyday. How much rain is in Arizona?

PEF voting NO this past week definitely is more on principal of the Occupy Wall St Marchers than on the selfish side. Folks, PEF has realized that the middle class will be all but extinct without some push back. Can’t we all come together as a middle class to change the beat down put on the class? Give PEF some credit for fighting on behalf of any middle class worker….